nanog mailing list archives
Re: RFC1918 conformance
From: Andrew Partan <asp () partan com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 14:27:36 -0500 (EST)
This would be good as I report each week in my report possible bogus routes but no one seems to care to filter (or fix this). Today it says:
Which routes to you consider to be bogons?
--asp () partan com (Andrew Partan)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: RFC1918 conformance, (continued)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Andrew Partan (Feb 10)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Bill Manning (Feb 11)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Andrew Partan (Feb 11)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Tony Bates (Feb 11)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Alex P. Rudnev (Feb 11)
- Re: [NANOG] RFC1918 conformance Jeffrey C. Ollie (Feb 11)
- Re: [NANOG] RFC1918 conformance Alex P. Rudnev (Feb 12)
- Re: [NANOG] RFC1918 conformance Dana Hudes (Feb 12)
- Re: [NANOG] RFC1918 conformance Alex P. Rudnev (Feb 13)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Jeffrey C. Ollie (Feb 13)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Bill Manning (Feb 11)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Andrew Partan (Feb 10)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Andrew Partan (Feb 11)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance Tony Bates (Feb 17)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance bgp4-adm (Feb 10)
- Re: RFC1918 conformance David Schwartz (Feb 10)